<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Open Petri Nets · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1808.05415/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1808.05415/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Open Petri Nets — mentioned by TimorousBestie</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44356351</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1808.05415:44356351</guid><pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:46:12 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; This almost certainly isn&amp;#x27;t the first time someone has done whatever it is you are claiming. I’ve seen category theory papers on this and related topics, but I haven’t seen code in the wild. Have you? IME this kind of finite state machine business code (as opposed to a FSM embedded in an algorithm somewhere) is written as a one-off each time. E.g., https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.05415 comes to mind. David I. Spivak has also done some work on composition of systems that is relevant.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1808.05415/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CT</category></item></channel></rss>
